GONE FISHIN' WITH THE FAB 5D2 !

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Annika1980, Jan 19, 2009.

  1. Annika1980

    Noons Guest

    Alan Smithee wrote,on my timestamp of 22/01/2009 3:12 AM:
    You are not very bright, are you?
     
    Noons, Jan 22, 2009
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. Annika1980

    Noons Guest

    Mark Thomas wrote,on my timestamp of 22/01/2009 11:40 AM:
    The only one with a hint of green envy is you, moron.
    That is a perfectly balanced colour shot.


    Do you actually ever show photos of your own
    instead of dumping on imaginary enemies?
     
    Noons, Jan 22, 2009
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. Annika1980

    Noons Guest

    Mark Thomas wrote,on my timestamp of 22/01/2009 5:31 PM:
    Yes dickhead. Here is an RGB value for you:
    254,255,254(G>R=B)
    Is that also "clearly" green in that monitor that
    only exists in your imagination?
     
    Noons, Jan 22, 2009
    #83
  4. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    How do you know how it looked straight from the camera?
    You only saw post-processed versions.

    And if you are claiming that your version is how it should look then
    how can you claim that my settings were all wrong when I took the
    pic? LOL! You're disproving your own arguments.

    Allow me to school your dumb ass. My settings were exactly where they
    needed to be to get a workable RAW file. Had I done what you and the
    other idiot (I'm assuming you are different idiots) suggested, I'd
    have blown the highlights beyond repair. I chose instead to capture
    everything I needed in the RAW file so I could get to it later.
     
    Annika1980, Jan 22, 2009
    #84
  5. Annika1980

    Mr.T Guest

    Yep, which is why I already said "fair point"!
    That is not the same as simply using a manul flash mode however.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 23, 2009
    #85
  6. Annika1980

    Mr.T Guest

    Or those that mean something else while simply specifying "manual flash
    mode".
    The matter is now clarified it seems.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 23, 2009
    #86
  7. You were the only one to mention "manual flash mode". I mentioned
    camera manual mode, which I did because sometimes the default
    camera-flash-off operation of the PC circuit is restricted to camera
    manual mode.

    For some reason you assumed I must be talking about "manual flash
    mode", whatever you meant by that ambiguous term :)
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 23, 2009
    #87
  8. Which is why I didn't use that ambiguous term :)
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 23, 2009
    #88
  9. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    I don't doubt that. You probably have every shot I've ever posted
    plastered on your wall. I just hope you have them laminated so they
    don't get sprayed in your moments of ecstasy.


    I'm still waiting on you to tell me what those mistakes are and what
    settings I should've used for those pics.
     
    Annika1980, Jan 23, 2009
    #89
  10. Annika1980

    Mr.T Guest

    I guess the words "mode" and "manual" were meant to mean something else
    then, but certainly don't mention anything that would require non standard
    equipment. Lets face it, YOU weren't clear, AND *I* already acknowledged
    there are circumstances where the camera does not know about non standard
    external flash guns and triggers. That wasn't enough for you?

    You have NOW cleared that up so why keep beating a dead horse.? If it makes
    you feel superior, maybe I have helped you there at least.
    Yes, it was hard to say what you meant by your ambiguous statement!
    Thanks for the clarification.

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 23, 2009
    #90
  11. Annika1980

    Mr.T Guest

    True, you were far more ambiguous!

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 23, 2009
    #91
  12. Annika1980

    Bill Boyce Guest

    That "Paul Parker": a piece of work, ain't he.? Never saw anybody so
    over-wrought over someone else's fine photography, so he may just be a
    troll or may be mentally ill, like the MI5 guy. Sorry either way; what a
    waste.

    Did Paul ever post anything here? I'd like to see how it's done.
    Seriously, I enjoy the photography here and Paul obviously knows a lot
    about it. Tech isn't my thing; I strive for emotional connections to the
    viewer and don't worry about the details, which can get in the way. Like
    appreciating humor. At one stage beyond his physical humor, Jerry
    Lewis analyzed everything to death: like "Is this funny, and WHY is this
    funny?", etc. I like George Burns' answer: "If they laugh, it's funny".

    I can't get over the negativity in this group, though. To what purpose
    and end does this contribute to this group? I guess I'm naive. Forgive
    me if so; I just like photography and am old. JPBill
     
    Bill Boyce, Jan 23, 2009
    #92
  13. Annika1980

    Ken Hart1 Guest

    snip>
    Respectfully, your last sentence is not exactly true. If there is a flash
    attached and turned on, there will be a voltage (quantity and polarity of
    which is determined by the flash unit) present across the internal contacts.
    And when those PC sync contacts close, there will be a current flow thru
    them (quantity & polarity etc...).

    So, the camera will "know" it, but in most cases, it has no mechanism to
    react to that voltage or current and it won't care.
     
    Ken Hart1, Jan 23, 2009
    #93
  14. Annika1980

    Bill Boyce Guest

    Four words: pot, kettle, black, ...period!
     
    Bill Boyce, Jan 23, 2009
    #94
  15. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    "Paul Parker", also Karl Hawkins on this thread, is the
    'anti-dslr-troll'. He often sticks to one sockpuppet per thread, but
    usually changes his name for each new post. He is easily recognisable
    from his tone, of course, but to verify just check the headers - he
    posts from cpinternet (Minnesota).

    He has a history of this behavior, and of promoting CHDK, a Canon camera
    hack. I recognised the tone immediately as the same guy who used to
    post at Steve's Forums as "Keoeeit" (now banned). From that he can also
    be found at DPReview as Keoeeit and Dave Ingols, as Keoeeit in many
    'interesting' forums across the internet, and was also doing this same
    thing a few years back as Baumbadier/X-Man and many other names, of
    course. Clearly, it gives him his 'kicks'.

    He will deny all this, but it is trivially easy to check, plus he's
    given his identity away several times by posting the same examples here
    as he did at Steve's (see below).
    Yes. He has tried to hide all his old images, but those that remain can
    be found at the links at the end of this post. To be fair, 1.5 of them
    are good... (O:
    Well, he seems to know a fair bit about bridge cameras, but his endless
    posturing and ridiculous exaggerations/false claims get very painful and
    boring, especially when he can't (he says 'won't') ((O: back them up.

    And you are in rec.photo.equipment.35mm? (O:
    Agreed. But here I am being negative in this post - and wait until you
    see "paul's" reply. (O:

    Here are "Paul's" images:
    Keoeeit Gallery
    ===============
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=96572
    (Beetle macro - ok, but over-processed)
    http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Drop_a.jpg
    (Water droplet - this is actually quite good, but does seem to be
    showing CA/PF, even at that size..?)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=96685
    (IR fox)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=96582
    (Raccoons - sometimes content overcomes technical issues, but not always..)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=101398
    (this was supposed to show high iso performance of a p&s)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=96597
    (Raccoons II)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=97424
    (Raccoon, nice example of aliasing artefacts in the whiskers)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=99180
    (Chipmunk - oversharpened and badly cropped)
    http://forums.steves-digicams.com/forums/attachment.php?id=100233
    (oversharpened geese panorama)
     
    Mark Thomas, Jan 23, 2009
    #95
  16. Annika1980

    J. Clarke Guest

    Well, actually a digital camera often does have a "mechanism to react
    to that voltage". Unfortunately the mechanism is the trigger circuit
    and the reaction is that the circuit fries.
     
    J. Clarke, Jan 24, 2009
    #96
  17. Annika1980

    Bill Boyce Guest

    Thanks for your post/explanation. On further reflection, I guess the
    main reason I'm indifferent to the detailed tech-talk here or argument
    about how pink the bird is, in this case, is that I'm severely red-green
    colorblind and partially blue-yellow blind. So I favor b&w pictures and
    look for other aspects of the color images. JPBill
     
    Bill Boyce, Jan 24, 2009
    #97
  18. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Understood. One of the reasons I still use Thumbsplus as an image
    browser is that it has a continuous RGB display of what ever is under
    the cursor. So if a tint is subtle, especially if I'm at someone else's
    computer, I can wander over the offending areas and see what the numbers
    say. After a while you get used to them, and of course they make it
    easy to pick, say a green or pink cast in what should be a neutral area.

    Do you do (or want to do) much post-processing on the computer? - there
    are tools that can help a lot with color-blindness.


    (By the way, you will note Keoeeit's predicted denial came from
    cpinternet...)
     
    Mark Thomas, Jan 24, 2009
    #98
  19. Annika1980

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Mark Thomas, Jan 24, 2009
    #99
  20. The phrase used was "Cameras have at least one mode of use (such as
    Manual)". I hoped it wouldn't be difficult to realise that I was
    likley to be referring to the modes of camera use specified by the
    mode dial one which is "Manual".

    There's nothing non-standard about using the PC sync circuit to fire
    flashes. It's the oldest standard of flash connection and is still
    provided by all cameras which support external flash guns. It's widely
    used by people who use multiple remote third party flashes. It's no
    more non-standard than using a Nikon or Sigma lens on a Canon camera.
    My apologies. I've cearly been guilty of taking advice from people on
    the internet who claim that the PC sync circuit is only active in
    certain modes, some of whom were apparently experts in using the
    facility on my own specific DSLR.

    I just went and tested it, and you're quite right, at least in my DSLR
    the PC sync circuit is active in all modes, including the special NO
    FLASH! mode.
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 24, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.